Pages

Wednesday, January 16, 2019

Bipartisanship? Not during the McConnell Presidency.

First, let's be clear about the government shut-down. Donald Trump loves the attention. But in fact, he is doing absolutely nothing. True, he's threatened to veto any measure to fund agencies till he gets his "wall." But that threat is meaningless till such a bill reaches his desk. And the person who is preventing that is Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell. McConnell must be giggling and chortling right now, as old Two Scoops pulls all the attention away from him. And Democrats are falling for it, when they could instead aggressively mock the GOP senators -- and Donald Trump -- as puppets of "President McConnell."== Shall we welcome "neocon" allies against madness? ==Oh irony. David Frum - one of the original "neoconservative" apologists - is like Oskar Schindler, a former partisan hack who found himself simply unable to follow his party beyond a certain point, down a hellhole of treason and evil. "The scandal of the Trump presidency leaves Americans only bad choices. Powers and privileges essential to the functioning of an honest and patriotic presidency are called into question by this dishonest and unpatriotic presidency. Succeeding presidents and Congresses will have to find a way to restore or replace busted norms with new ones—but pretending now that the old rules can function as intended is not only delusive, but dangerous." It's a well-written essay, offering insight into how hard it would be to subpoena the translator from those Putin meetings. (Still, Ms. Gross should be careful on the street, and avoid men with umbrellas.)As for "reformed" neocons like Mr. Frum, well, we need all hands on deck, and I will fight anyone who tries to narrow the Union's big tent in this critical phase of the Civil War. That means receiving and welcoming help even from former monsters, even the 'Worst American,' George F. Will. In Schindler times, you welcome help from Schindlers, who refuse to sink all the way with their treasonous party.**So read this piece. It shows the minefield that would lead all the way to SCOTUS, if the House tries to subpoena the interpreter. And yet, there should be a path. In particular, I am appalled to learn the answer to a question I asked at an intelligence agency in 2004. "Do you have a small office dedicated to watching for enemy subornation at the nation's highest levels?" At the time, I was thinking about the Bush family's utter devotion to their kissing cousins in the Saudi Royal House, but such an office would have had the skills even more needed, today.I got no answer then, nor did I expect one. But now I know. We all know. Crap, they never had such a team. How in the world could that be? Back then, my "threats" slideshow featured one that spoke of "subornation" and it got indulgent smirks. No longer. Now, when I show it, I get gasps.== Another must-read ==On WIRED a truly key insight:"THE PATTERN OF (Trump's) pro-Putin, pro-Russia, anti-FBI, anti-intelligence community actions are so one-sided, and the lies and obfuscation surrounding every single Russian meeting and conversation so consistent that if this president isn’t actually hiding a massive conspiracy, it means the alternative is worse: America elected a chief executive so oblivious to geopolitics, so self-centered and personally insecure, so naturally predisposed to undermine democratic institutions and coddle authoritarians, and so terrible a manager and leader that he cluelessly surrounded himself with crooks, grifters, and agents of foreign powers that he’s compromised the national security of the US government and undermined 75 years of critical foreign alliances, just to satiate his own ego." Oh, but there's more, and better.*== Failing Bipartisan Efforts ==

A highly sapient article goes to why "bipartisan" efforts have been failing for 40 years. And why, faced with demographic collapse, GOP politicians reach for ever-more blatant methods of cheating. Secret money, gerrymandering and voter suppression are justified by your mad uncle who - with a straight face and no sense of shame - says "it's the only way we can win and keep back the mob."Examples from the article: the Democrats' foremost proposed bill HR1 would promote wildly popular (70%+ polling) anti-cheating reforms like: "public financing of federal elections through a voluntary small donor-match, requiring that Super PACs and “dark money” groups make their donors public, requiring the president to disclose his or her tax returns, creating a new ethical code for the Supreme Court, restoring the Voting Rights Act, creating a national automatic voter registration system, ending partisan gerrymandering in federal elections and prohibiting voter-roll purging."

"While Democrats are getting ready to roll out that broadly popular, nonpartisan, pro-democracy package, what are Republicans doing? In several states where they suffered midterm defeats, they attempted lame-duck sessions to launch anti-democratic power grabs. I"In Michigan, where Democrats won the top three statewide offices — governor, attorney general and secretary of state — for the first time since 1990, the lame-duck GOP legislature attempted to dilute the power of all three offices."The only remaining rationalization for volcanic levels of open cheating is "keeping back the mob." The same justification offered by feudal lords for 6000 years, and the reason for both the English and American revolutions... and every subsequent phase of the U.S. Civil War. This is not politics! Politics in America was killed, dead, by Newt Gingrich and Dennis "friend to boys" Hastert in the 1990s and Mitch McConnell squats like a lead gargoyle on the coffin lid as we thump and pry to open it.If their putsch succeeds, it will be a world run by mafias. (Did you see the high five exchanged by two leading dons from the Kremlin and Riyadh clans?There is some unease at these levels. The smarter oligarchs are starting to realize this coming world will not let them enjoy the fruits of restored feudalism. Not when they've made enemies of all the castes and professions who know stuff like science, cybernetics, molecular biology and fission. Their dreams now drift to "Postman" style redoubts in Patagonia, Paraguay and New Zealand. And yes, those mad dreams, too, are built on fairy dust. The truly smartest ones are realizing that the grand plan, for all its recent successes, will not have a future. More and more, Revolution's in the air, and only one choice will soon remain.Will it be an American-style "revolution" like we had in the 1770s and 1860s, or when the Greatest Generation revitalized market enterprise while engendering a thriving middle class and still leaving the rich very comfortable? Or will it be the more common style, seen aross 4000 years, in which emotion carries the angry mob? Like 1917. Or 1789? Now may be a good time for cheaters to pick the color of their tumbrel.

== A great place to start demanding wagers ==

In an ultimate test of the utter gullibility of our poor confederate neighbors, many of them are fixated on the latest Kremlin-sourced meme, spread by every treason site, reportedly showing Rep. Nancy Pelosi prescribing a Democratic Party smear tactic. I know a number of RASRs – residually adult-sane Republicans – who are not hateful or unpatriotic fellows, but who cling to these treason sites, suckling obscenely deceitful crap. In this case, though, OMG! Not one of them questions how the video suddenly starts?

So eager are they to actually believe she's talking about democrats using that tactic, it never occurs to them to ask for the two minutes that just preceded the sudden start of this Pelosi “confession.” It is a blatant howler, but they actually, actually swallow such an obvious ploy.

I offered a wager to one RASR I know. If it turned out Pelosi was saying what the treason site claimed, I would pay him $100. But if I was right, and he’d been suckered, he would promise to never again trust the Kremlin-funded liars who post this kind of garbage, and to in-future ask the blatantly obvious questions, and maybe spread his net wider to get other views.

Alas, as always happens when I try to corner a RASR with a wager, he scooted away. But that doesn’t mean wagers are useless! There are maybe a million decent, patriotic, intelligent and still somewhat adult-sane Republicans out there who desperately cling to magical incantations, to maintain loyalty to a party that long ago left them, betrayed them and has plunged headlong into treason. Their obedience to oligarch-mafiosi and former KGB agents who were all raised from birth to be communists is… weird. But they evade all applications of logic, and run away from bets.

What you do accomplish by demanding a wager is to bring into play a different part of their minds, one that is pragmatic about actual money and honor and even long-forgotten things called facts! Oh, your RASR will run away from putting money on it. They never have the balls to actually bet on one of their incantations. But still, he (and it is always a “he”) sometimes is shaken into thinking new thoughts.

And let me be clear, these fellows, not a majority of GOP males but an important sub-set, are worth the effort! They are decent neighbors and the old-fashioned, sincere kind of conservatives. Alas, they truly – if mistakenly – think they are on the side of the American Experiment, instead of helping its enemies.

Winning just one million of them back into some kind of light is worth trying. Indeed, that may be the last best hope for our republic.

== The bizarre Bezos bonanza... ==

In desperation, the mad right-o-sphere is gleefully attacking Amazon's Jeff Bezos over his looming divorce from his wife MacKenzie, after 25 years. Ooh, wag your fingers over some slightly corny-embarrassing texts, why don't you. (Indeed, one can be puzzled over why rich and famous people use social media at all, let alone texting or twitter. Especially for any off-the-books relationships. Can't they afford intranets?) After 25 years, the Bezos divorce is described as amicable, and hence -- human flaws and some silly things notwithstanding -- this is not very much my business, or yours. But sure, Red America, you are free to hold up your divorce rate against Blue America's, or rates of success for your "abstinence only" sex education programs, or rates of gambling, addiction or teen pregnancy, or STDs and so on. By all means, let's compare outcomes.Seriously? You can try to tar a democratic leaning zillionaire as "immoral" for a divorce far milder than any of Newt's three, Limbaugh's three, Reagan's, Trump's two, McCain's... and then perverts like Larry Craig and Roy Moore and Dennis "friend to boys" Hastert, who both buggered children and buggered America by deliberately ending all negotiated politics in the USA?

You know I was just getting started. The list goes on and on. But it really boils down to one fact -- that Jeff & MacKenzie Bezos were among the most effective teams in the history of our species. And I'd wager they'll continue to be.----* Look who agrees with the WIRED piece, using many of the same terms. ** Meanwhile, just to illustrate that not all US conservative have gone insane, see the cogent legal scholar Jack Goldsmith who still had hopes a year ago that Tillerson & Mattis might moderate the insanity, in this interview by Bill Kristol who, though he was a neocon idiot, seems to have "Schindlered" along with David Frum and others, unable to follow the GOP down a rabbit hole of treason.

104 comments:

Dr. Brin, I have a Special Request. Would it be all right if I sent an e-mail to your interview/booking contact e-mail address about something I'd rather whisper than shout? It concerns a potential Western strategic vulnerability which makes a recent 'crazy' news story sound less crazy and really scary. If you read it and agree, perhaps you could pass it on to contacts in the defense community (Ilithi would be very interested, but maybe you know people more... senior.)

TCB that's fine. I've managed to maintain a fairly open accessibility far longer than I ever expected, given my confrontational public persona. You can reach me via http://www.davidbrin.com (scroll down.)

Meanwhile, just to illustrate that not all US conservative have gone insane, see the cogent legal scholar Jack Goldsmith who still had hopes a year ago that Tillerson & Mattis might moderate the insanity, in this interview by Bill Kristol who, though he was a neocon idiot, seems to have "Schindlered" along with David Frum and others, unable to follow the GOP down a rabbit hole of treason.https://conversationswithbillkristol.org/video/jack-goldsmith/

BTW, I gather there is a very strong professional code among translators, not far shy of doctor-patient privacy, and they don't talk about what they heard.

But Ms. Gross might do well to walk into Mueller's office if she can and get deposed ASAP.

Con: professional suicide or near to it.

Pro: might be physically safer to spill her secrets and make it a fait accompli, rather than walk around being the only free-ranging vessel of them. The Umbrella Man arguably achieves more if he silences her before, rather than punish her after.

I've pointed out the absurdity of the situation to multiple people here in Austin, TX. How the wall funding was never advanced when the GOP had full control because it wouldn't have passed and would have made the GOP look fractured and stupid. Only once they had Pelosi and the Democrats to try to blame did it suddenly become an issue and a national emergency. Poppycock.

>> Mike Will said...//I'm a systems designer and AI developer (for many decades!)

I would like to ask it, then.What you opinion about Lenat and his EURISCO (not CyC, with it all is moot)?I even have some code and dig out some docs... dunno, why nobody trying to repeat... his success?

>> Alfred Differ said...\\As for bastard languages, any cultural group faced with frequent invasions is probably going to have one. Considering Ukraine's location on the map and the geopolitical importance of Crimea, it's no shock.

I said Russian is bastard language. Not Ukrainian.Bastardisation it's what await us... if we'll be successful with our nation building.You really are far from continental/europian history... or from evolutional thinking.Because it's not external oppression that mixes and bastardise things.External force can only preserve (or destroy) things.To make it brim, one needs time, warm place and some yeast. ;)

And what "geopolitical importance of Crimea" may I ask? %)))

\\As evidence, one could ask wither parents expected their children to surpass them. Even a secret desire for our children to improve upon themselves would be enough to demonstrate the failure of a pastoral metaphor.

Not surpass... but sidewalk.What else one can await from specie with sexual crossingover? ;)When progeny has part of mother and half of father traits/genes,how could they continue JUST one of the parent walk???

\\Turns out our bones are wrong for larger communities, though. Planners need too much information to be effective at scale.

Read the matters, damn.

[PDF]SOCIALISM, ECONOMIC CALCULATION AND ENTREPRENEURSHIPmises.pl/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/socialism.pdfBY. Jesús Huerta de Soto ... Socialism as an Intellectual Error.Calculation as a Fundamentally Economic (and not Technical) Problem.

Centralized collection of such information IS JUST IMPOSSIBLE.Because important for market information,it's DEEP FUSE of external info (demands, prices, etc) and INTERNAL -- own capabilities and intentions of the entrepreneur.

If you are trying to cut one from another... it's very simple to pull. Just by sheer indiscriminate force. %\You ARE BREAKING that coupling. And that is the end -- you'll never had the actual info.It's like trying to take and hold an egg... with scissors.You'd have only fractured crust.

\\EVERY ATTEMPT at central planning at scale dehumanizes the people being controlled... or fails.

Rest assured.While CP need to be built from human material... it'll just fail. Sooner or later.Only CP as outer force is all we need to be feared of.

In USSR for example, it was CP only by name... but the real thing was driven by semi-marketing "snabjentsy"/resource dealers and continuous struggle between center and regions, and constant maneuvers of costs on closed accounts... that's why it was broken so evenly.

What would be impossible, if it be REAL CP. %)

>> matthew said...\\Hmm, more racist crap from loco. To be expected.

Do NOT feed the troll. %)

Let him WORK for his food -- by providing some viable arguments, at least. ;)

I only just now saw the hunt for #WheresMitch by AOC, so we had the same thought. I have to admit, I saw no reason to deem her more than a lightweight... but I am starting to shift my opinion. Starting. Her fad appeal could wind up harmful... but I am starting to hope for real savvy from a rising player. One who won't be caught with a laptop stuffed with porn. Go women.

The zeroth law is how Isaac flipped everything. The "masters" are innumerable-cheap-expendable and ignorant and powerless. The "servants" are few-powerful and secretly manipulative. A ruling caste of court eunuchs It was the only way to combine Isaac's robot universe with his Galactic one.

\\That means is memes. I care about my kids and I hope some folks carrying my genes will be around to enjoy the world of 300 years from now.

I... want to be around there. And see all with my own eyes... or fotoelements. %P

And WE are not so far from that dream. Only... I don't know, is it previous generation are past that hope? Completely? %)

See future for themselves only in grave?

I need to know it. As it defines greatly -- what is possible and what not.As that's, previous generation holds the most grip on power and resources.And as such... define what techs will be developing...

For example. I myself, clearly see prospects of Drexler-like techs.With almighty robots swarms, which will cleverly directed can build anything anywhere. (or make WW3 %((()

But... do I need to wait for next generation to come in power?Millennials and Zero Geners to talk about such things? %(((((((((((((((((((((

>> David Brin said...\\The zeroth law is how Isaac flipped everything.

Thank you.I see it now.You are looking on it as on mere plot device.And tend to not pay attention to Humanistic Message of It All.

While I specifically highlighted it. "R.Giscard RESOLVE" -- with WHAT thoughts must cope that inadvertently human-loving mind... to pull all that?I see it that... Asimov knew it better, that it's IMPOSSIBLE contradiction for mere human being.So he put all the burden on steel shoulders of robots.

I see... its "otcy i dety"/fathers and children kind of situation.

When children are contrarian to fathers beliefs... but ready to embrace grandfathers ones. %)

\\The "masters" are innumerable-cheap-expendable and ignorant and powerless.

How so?Are we read the same books?Or it's just rhetorical...

\\The "servants" are few-powerful and secretly manipulative.

And non-humanly benevolent. You constantly are trying to forget it. It looks that way, at least.

Machiavellism... is not your strong point, isn't it? ;)I am as past inhabitant of The Country of All Encompassing Machiavellism see it.(and they still live there... in RFia)Hope you'd understand it. And will not take it as ad hominem. As it never intended.

\\A ruling caste of court eunuchs It was the only way to combine Isaac's robot universe with his Galactic one.

Are we about literature tropes here?Or about something else, like life itself?

Starting in the late 1950s, working at SAO, MIT, and SLAC, a brilliant astronomer named Charles Moore crafted the FORTH language (for Fourth generation, an early compiler was limited to 5 char symbols). It was a concatenative language, originally meant for controlling observatory equipment. You can think of it as 'Lisp for robot minds'. When I discovered his FORTH, I grabbed a soldering iron and a box of CMOS chips, and embarked on the journey I'm still on, with Asimov lurking in my brain like a hologlyph. Unfortunately, I'm a very ordinary man who just stumbled through a few of the right doors - almost a Forrest Gump of AI. MIT, Stanford, and CMU would have been better paths... (my career was mainly in the automotive and energy sectors).

Lenat and Eurisko were/are way out of my league, although I've always thought that math and science could be automated. Neither holds numinous mystery. We are only evolved 'meat machines', not gods. Ignorance of that fact is a shaky basis for any ideology.

I'm not dogmatic about any of this stuff. Criticism and argument are welcomed because one learns little in an echo chamber.

Arizsun Ahola:I've pointed out the absurdity of the situation to multiple people here in Austin, TX. How the wall funding was never advanced when the GOP had full control because it wouldn't have passed and would have made the GOP look fractured and stupid. Only once they had Pelosi and the Democrats to try to blame did it suddenly become an issue and a national emergency.

I'm not sure that's the exact dynamic at work. The precipitating event which caused Trump to refuse to sign the Senate bill wasn't the Democrats coming to power, but Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter, and "Dr" Ingraham pushing back against not shutting down the government over the wall.

"By eventually connecting the Arch Libraries, and the Arch storage devices they contain, through a decentralised read-write data sharing network that spans the Solar System, we can begin to grow and share a collective decentralised library of everything humanity learns, on every planet in our Solar System, and even beyond, as we spread," Spivack says.

Ok, I've got an off-topic but science-y question for people who know stuff.

A colleague at work was trying to tell me that the Three Laws of Thermodynamics (not robotics) actually follow logically from the property "Heat cannot flow from a colder body to a warmer body."

It seems to me that his statement is actually a consequence of the part of the Second Law that says that heat will flow from high concentration to low concentration. I also claimed that his statement is in fact false, as heat self-evidently can flow from a cold body (a refrigerator interior) to a hotter one (the outside world) as long as energy is applied to make that happen. But even ignoring that aspect, my contention is that "Heat cannot flow..." is a consequence of the Second Law, not something the Second Law depends upon.

jim:I think that the best thing about [Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez] is that she is not afraid of Congressional Republicans, the right wing media, nor the lame, compromised, corporate Democrats in congress.

Her response to that video showing her (gasp!) dancing was a good indication of things to come.

Radio host Norman Goldman finally realizes why Donald Trump loves the shutdown so much. It follows from the way he likes to stiff people who work for him. The "essential" government employees have to work without pay. And he just decided that a whole bunch of the furloughed employees are actually "essential" and ordered them back to work (without pay).

Thermodynamics seems to have consumed Asimov right from the "Foundation" days (1940-1950). Asimov's favourite own-story was "The Last Question" which told of a near-limitless supercomputer working to solve the Heat Death of the Universe problem. I didn't like the ending, as I've said in here before.

Being a big fan of FNAL (and Chicago too), I loved this piece, which suggests a much more satisfying solution to The Last Question:https://www.universal-sci.com/headlines/2018/6/20/how-an-advanced-civilization-could-stop-dark-energy-from-preventing-their-future-exploration

//You are looking on it as on mere plot device.And tend to not pay attention to Humanistic Message of It All.

Of course I see the humanistic implications! But it all began as a plot device, because Isaac had primitive humanity with robots in the 1990s, but no robots in the year 30,000. There had to be a reason. That reason would be repression of robot tech… by robots.

// Hope you'd understand it. And will not take it as ad hominem. As it never intended.

I understand Machiavellism Much better than you think I do. Please read Foundation’s Triumph.

Jim: I do not mind the AOC rebellions against classic liberals in deep blue districts. I do mind slagging them as “corporate” when many of them strove very hard. And we must remember that the 41 seat shift that made Pelosi Speaker was accomplished by MODERATE dems seizing red districts, not by leftie rebels.

LarryHart you are right and that is the principle behind my novel SUNDIVER.

Jack Goldsmith headed the Office of Legal Counsel at DOJ under Bush. He is a "conservative" in the older sense. See this interview by Bill Kristol who is joining the other neocons like Frum and George Will in declaring themselves "Schindlers" unable to follow their party down a rabbit hole of treason and insanity.

Jack Goldsmith on American Institutions and the Trump Presidencyhttps://conversationswithbillkristol.org/video/jack-goldsmith/The Harvard law professor shares his perspective on the state of American institutions during the Trump presidency.

Dr Brin: because Isaac had primitive humanity with robots in the 1990s, but no robots in the year 30,000. There had to be a reason. That reason would be repression of robot tech… by robots.

This is why, while I can appreciate the craftsmanship of the later Robot/Foundation stories, I personally wish Asimov hadn't decided to force consistency on the two separate works. The lengths he had to twist both concepts ended up turning the exercise into (as Dave Sim once put it) "a kind of reverse alchemy, turning gold into lead." And as much as I can admire the accomplishment that transmuation of elements would represent, in the end, I'd rather have the gold.

I've found it is rare in physics for it to be clear which concept is the cause of another. Start with one and demonstrate the other as a consequence. All we really know is that the connected concepts are mutually consistent and from a pragmatic perspective, that's all that really matters. Consistent theories produce consistent hypotheses to test.

This is much more clear when you look at a field theory. Do electric and magnetic fields exist because of moving charges? Are the potentials more fundamental? I learned a way in grad school that shows how Maxwell's four equations in a 3D model collapse to just one in a 4D model and are a consequence of the continuity of the current density. As long as current (flowing charge) can't be created or destroyed in the model, Maxwell's theory HAS to be. Continuity is actually a statement about symmetry, so what is most fundamental here? The current? The symmetry? Doesn't matter actually as long as the whole model is consistent.

The second law in thermodynamics addresses a current involving probability flow because entropy is fundamentally about the bazillion ways a system can do what it's doing without changing any of the macro-information that can be observed. It doesn't matter if it is THIS electron orbiting THAT proton in a hydrogen atom in a particular water molecule. As we've learned, we might not even be ABLE to know which is which. That's why there are different statistical models within thermodynamics. Underneath, though, it is still probability and currents. Consistency is what matters.

On the old "Cerebus" list, I used to argue with a conservative Christian who insisted that evolution without a designer would violate the Second Law of Thermodynamics by decreasing entropy. In response to the argument that the sun was providing input into the system, he actually thought an irrefutable counter was "But what if you include the sun in the system?"

Here on this blog, I don't think that fallacy requires further explanation.

If we are going to use Oskar Schindler as a metaphor, we should be asking exactly who these conservatives are actually saving. Schindler wasn't in a position to stop all the madness and focused on preventing some of it regarding certain people within his reach.

Alfred Differ:I've found it is rare in physics for it to be clear which concept is the cause of another. Start with one and demonstrate the other as a consequence.

I get what you're saying, but in the particular case I mentioned, the claim was that the Second Law of Thermodynamics followed from the property that "Heat cannot flow from cold to hot." I asserted that the reverse was true.

It's not so much a matter of which is cause and which is effect. Rather, "Heat cannot flow..." seems to be a specific, special case of the more generalized Second Law. Which is what I meant by "follows from".

The "good" conservatives/Republicans who wish Trump wasn't Trump but don't act to effect any kind of actual change (because liberals would be worse) remind me of a certain conversation between Gordon and Dena in The Postman. Gordon insists there are plenty of good men who are neither heroes nor monsters, and Dena counters that they ultimately don't matter. They have no input into the course of civilization.

The litany of once anti-Trump Republicans who nevertheless empower him to be what he is--Chris Christie, Ted Cruz, John McCain, Lindsay Graham, Susan Collins, Jeff Flake, Bob Corker, Paul Ryan, Mitch McConnell--would seem to bear that observation out.

Trump is merely the eye watering stinky turd that is overwhelming the senses and thereby garnering most of the attention. I wish more of the press and more of the public would focus more on the guts that produced and then dropped that stinky load on us. I've been saying it for two years now, Mitch McConnell is the most despicable human in the country. And many of his ilk, Larry mentioned a few, are right behind him.

Alfred the continuity equation is the fundamental by which science studies inputs, outputs and changes within a box, atom sized or the universe.

“I see them talk, but Schindler did more.”

Absolutely.

LH: even if a creationist demands an explanation for the quality energy pouring from the sun… going back to the Big Bang… then he is conceding the position taken by the Catholic Church, that the Creator set things in motion, then stood back (except for interventions in the heart/soul.)

Our fine host, who quite rightly claims to "understand Machiavellism" & attributes the current US government shutdown to a dysfunctionally partisan US Congress (rather than Trump), may be interested in this rather Machiavellism scenario offered up by the conservative web:

Of course, (1) today is Shutdown Day #27, (2) the weekend fast approaches, (3) federal statutes require automatic 'reductions-in-force' (RIF) for federal employees who have been furloughed for >31 days, and (4) the OMB director denies that any "immediate layoffs" or RIFs are planned any time soon, so it would appear that various federally-employed bureaucrats may have dodged a bullet.

Or, have they?

Did I forget to mention that RIF protocol requires 60-day notice prior to automatic termination?

Or, that Mick Mulvaney, current OMB director, is also Trump's Interim White House Chief of Staff?

It makes the 'Small Government Libertarian' within me glad to think that the federal government just became 30% smaller.

I tend to interpret thermodynamics as you do. Second law implies order of heat flow. It's just that I can see an argument for interpreting energy as more fundamental and entropy as a secondary, derived, concocted property used to justify things. That approach makes the second law empirical instead of fundamental.

Thermodynamics is the weird one among all the physics theories. It is the one that will probably still be standing when all the others are dust. It is the one that looks most magical. It's also the one that most closely imitates what micro-economics theories do. They declare the existence of certain state properties, and ponder what happens when dependent variables change. Economists call the ideal 'marginal something-or-other'. Neat stuff, but it sets off my Popper alarm. 8)

I learned two things:A) Donald Trump wants 5.700 million dollars to build the wall.B) Seven Democratic lawmakers went to the White House to plead with Donald Trump to reopen the government

¿Are they really going to give all that money to someone we know is a compulsive scammer? ¿Is not it obvious that Donald wants to keep a huge slice of that money?This is a theft system widely used by politicians in Latin America.Suggestion for Democratic Leaders: If you are going to approve money for the construction of the wall, make sure that the congress has direct control over the choice of the companies that are going to build the wall. (do not choose the companies recommended by Trump)If Donald can choose the companies that will build the wall, then he will keep a huge slice of the pie.¡Do not give in to Donald; That usurper is a thief!

Moving on to another issue: I continue to fight against a computer virus that causes harmful modifications of the system in apparently random ways.

Winter7:¿Are they really going to give all that money to someone we know is a compulsive scammer? ¿Is not it obvious that Donald wants to keep a huge slice of that money?

The Republican congresspeople don't care about the wall or the money. What they care about is holding onto Trump's deplorable voters, because they've alienated everybody else. And Trump's deplorable voters want the wall because they like being mean to Mexicans, and because they like making liberals mad.

Yah. What got me as a student was the equivalence of continuity and symmetry. Say something about the universe that involves a symmetry and a continuity equation is immediately implied. Time reversal? Energy. Spatial isotropy? Momentum. Lepton number? xxx. It shows how physics is inherently geometrical in a way Newton would have respected.

I went to a small school for undergraduate years, so it was quite the thing to sit in on a seminar and puzzle over this equivalence. One of our professors (who came from from UCSD) tried hard to impress upon us just how weird and amazing the equivalence was. He was the reason I applied only to UC schools later. 8)

Certainly, forget that in the US Congress there are many Republicans ... But the only positive thing is that now nobody can deny that Donald has a childish and despotic attitude to infinite degrees. If Donald continues with the closure of government, that may be convenient, so that the American people understand that the only thing that concerns Donald, is to obtain what Donald wants. Because Donald loves himself more than anyone in the universe.

Larry Hart:I'm not sure that's the exact dynamic at work. The precipitating event which caused Trump to refuse to sign the Senate bill wasn't the Democrats coming to power, but Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter, and "Dr" Ingraham pushing back against not shutting down the government over the wall.

That is a valid point. It may just push my point back one level though. Why did these people suddenly throw a tantrum when the stupid wall hadn't been funded for the two years the GOP had complete control?

Reports now coming out that Trump ordered Cohen to lie to Congress. Instructions supposedly documented in email, texts and writing. If this is true this could be the big one. Even Barr, Trump's nominee for AG, stated that this would be obstruction of justice, though it was a hypothetical when he said that. This is one of the things that brought Nixon down.

Exactly. So the Book of Revelation is irrelevant because clearly He changed His mind.

Winter7, for 20 years, no business would work with Trump unless a neutral fiduciary actually held the money, took income and paid creditors. If a Trump got his hands on a joint business's cash flow, it would vanish.

locumranch | The government won't stay 30% smaller. These things have counter-punches. Only a libertarian (small or big L) from the idiot caucus thinks they can force the scope reduction.

In case anyone missed it, though, FB libertarians are running polls on their party planks. Most of them are overwhelmingly supported even if vaguely worded, but this one wasn't. It's relevant.

_______________________________3.4 Free Trade and Migration

We support the removal of governmental impediments to free trade. Political freedom and escape from tyranny demand that individuals not be unreasonably constrained by government in the crossing of political boundaries. Economic freedom demands the unrestricted movement of human as well as financial capital across national borders._______________________________

~500 comments later, the vote was 58% / 42% against. Obviously, party leadership has lost the base which means we are infested with the same confederate attitude found in the GOP. Yah. It's been mentioned before, but there it is with quantitative evidence.

>> David Brin said...//Of course I see the humanistic implications! But it all began as a plot device, because Isaac had primitive humanity with robots in the 1990s, but no robots in the year 30,000. There had to be a reason. That reason would be repression of robot tech… by robots.

Modern sifi... or Lem-like sifi ;) would have other answer on that question.Where you see ploys and coups.I'll just state that. It was impossible to re-create ALL industry needed to make positronic brain.Same way as it would be impossible and really impossible,to make electronic chip fro smartphones... on the Mars or Moon.

TOO big of a chain of technoligies need to be re-installed.Chain which need 8 billion of people on Earth.And not dosens... or even thousands on the Moon.

That from ruler side, yes.But what with that encompassing one. When oppressed start to think in the same terms.As it is now in RFia. As it was in USSR. And as it is... in China?Maybe every country have some of it.Something like Stockholm Syndrome.

>> Larry Hart said...//This is why, while I can appreciate the craftsmanship of the later Robot/Foundation stories, I personally wish Asimov hadn't decided to force consistency on the two separate works

I do not understand that claim "two separate works".

All mentioned details was already dry-runned in his robot stories:robot with telepathy, robot as a Presidente of the Earth,positronic mind that have tough time to cope with a math twist -- that his beloved humans must die... to be able to travel through hyperspace.

All prerequisites was set. So why "two different"?

Of cource, Asimov have some short-sighted understanding of colonisation of other planets.Like, that there is numerous worlds which are basically the same as Earth. Even with identical biospheres NOT harmful for humans.

What is laughable by current standards of sifi. And science.

But it's a sin of all Gold Age authors.

\\he actually thought an irrefutable counter was "But what if you include the sun in the system?"

Yeap. One would need to add all Universe. ;)

>> Mike Will said...

I think you, as fellow "believer in Evolution",could enjoy that observation...there is book about it, and I will search for it if you want.

But basic idea is quite simple -- just look at Timeline:All Age of Universe is 14 billion years, but Age of Earth 4 billion and (almost) all of it is Age of Life.

Then take that 4 billion Age of Life, and observe that most of it was pre-bio and RNA and so on life... and Cambrian Explosion of Evolution only 500 million.

>> Winter7\\Moving on to another issue: I continue to fight against a computer virus that causes harmful modifications of the system in apparently random ways.

I use myself and greatly suggest some ISO/flash OS boot images with Antivirus on it.To boot separately from your main OS... as some viruses can hide itself on boot stage.I myself use DrWeb... but if you fear "these nasty russians" I'm sure there is others.

\\Ask everyone: ¿Are Google's satellite images freely usable?

Via Google Earth?

>> Larry Hart said...\\No, from his POV, once you concede a Creator, then He can do anything at any time for any reason.

If look on Universe as sandbox/simulation... it's of course must be possibleto stop it and/or to make any desirable modifications. %P

And even more than that -- there could be lots of Universes... in the God's Chest. %)

But... science also has knack in that Multiverse Thing. %)

\\To him, the shutdown is TWOTBDA.

I tried to ignore it. But it rubs me. And Google gives no answer.What the heck that "TWOTBDA" is??? %)

>> Alfred Differ said...\\Continuity is actually a statement about symmetry, so what is most fundamental here? The current? The symmetry? Doesn't matter actually as long as the whole model is consistent.

I'd say a model is the most important thing.As far as you have a model, even if simplistic and not correct in details -- you have a way to comprehend -- is your understanding correct?

If yo... one has no model. He destined to be lost in a forest of "high abstractions"... even if this forest consist of 3 pines (pun on russian idiom on lost for no good reason %)) only.

@Darrell E:Right On! The Republicans are so adept at setting targets - Pelosi, Clinton, Harris, Ocasio-Cortez - stirring up their base to a rabid froth, and all the Democrats have is the Great Dumpster Fire. I had hoped this piece would target McConnell more, but he somehow always eludes the spotlight.

porohobot:/This is why, while I can appreciate the craftsmanship of the later Robot/Foundation stories, I personally wish Asimov hadn't decided to force consistency on the two separate works

I do not understand that claim "two separate works"....All prerequisites was set. So why "two different"?

Asimov, especially back in his early days, structured his stories as engineering problems. There was always the gloss of mystery/action/adventure to make the stories compelling to read, but the conflict resolution typically involved solving some mechanical and/or logical problem.

In the Foundation books, the problems to be solved were in the realm of psychohistory. In the robot books, the problems to be solved were in the realm of the Three Laws of Robotics. Those are two different kinds of stories, and forcing them into the same box is a diminishment of both.

For examples, I have to give spoilers, but I have a very hard time with the notion that psychohistory was something that robots decided was necessary, and then essentially engineered Hari Seldon into being so that he could invent the science.

porohobot:\\he actually thought an irrefutable counter was "But what if you include the sun in the system?"

Yeap. One would need to add all Universe. ;)

Actually, the sun makes my point quite nicely. The other guy apparently didn't understand what "in the system" actually entails. He thought that if the sun is in the system, then the sun's energy input doesn't count, so evolution then represents a loss of entropy "of the system". What he didn't recognize is that if the sun is in the system, then the sun's gain of entropy counts toward the whole.

What is considered "in the system" or not is a semantic matter--simply various ways of parsing the same problem. It makes no difference to the outcome where you consider the boundaries of "the system" in question. One must not confuse the map with the territory.

I tried to ignore it. But it rubs me. And Google gives no answer.What the heck that "TWOTBDA" is??? %)

It's an acronym our host uses (maybe without the T in the middle?) to mean "Things We Ought to Be Doing Anyway." Like using cheaper and less-polluting energy is something we ought to be doing anyway whether or not there is climate change.

I was making the darkly-humorous observation that stiffing his workers is something Trump thinks he should be doing anyway, whether or not there is a fight over the wall.

\\Asimov, especially back in his early days, structured his stories as engineering problems. There was always the gloss of mystery/action/adventure to make the stories compelling to read, but the conflict resolution typically involved solving some mechanical and/or logical problem.

Khm... even if I see it, that there really is clever technical solutions.Like with solving dilemma of "Robot cannot harm human -- But if you'll not do something to ensure THAT your candidate to be President of the Earth, who IS robot, accused that "HE IS ROBOT!"... will loose".But, pardon me, circumstances of THAT problem itself IS deeply humanistic and social one. Not mere technical, mechanical...

I cannot see it other way. And I clearly see it in many other stories, if not all.

Doctor, what's wrong with me? %P

\\In the Foundation books, the problems to be solved were in the realm of psychohistory.

How come?Hardly.Most of the time psychohistory either not yet complete to make some predictions,not known by figures of a play or just not explained explicitly(how could it be done, at all???), its role.

\\In the robot books, the problems to be solved were in the realm of the Three Laws of Robotics.

And that's why there is Zeroth Law, at your service. ;)That's why I named it THE PIVOT.

\\Those are two different kinds of stories, and forcing them into the same box is a diminishment of both.

I still unable to perceive that difference. Sorry.

Maybe it'll take more time. Or just another perspective.If you'd see no point in elaborating it futher -- that's no prob.Thank you for discussion. And pardon me my stubbornness. "For the sake of discovering of the truth".(tm) (shy)

\\What he didn't recognize is that if the sun is in the system, then the sun's gain of entropy counts toward the whole.

Yeap. "Burning" of the Sun increase entropy...but it can do it ONLY because there is that VAST Universe to dissipate it...if it'll be closed in Solar System border for example, it would achieve equilibrium long ago.So... Sun is needed as Source of neg-entropy.But Black Sky are also needed... to dump excess of energy. ;)That's why Universe itself is thermodynamical machine. %)

Therefore...

\\It makes no difference to the outcome where you consider the boundaries of "the system" in question.

is not correct.

\\It's an acronym our host uses...

Thank you.

\\Like using cheaper and less-polluting energy is something we ought to be doing anyway whether or not there is climate change.

There is a problem I percieve.Evolution does not "think" about some better ways.Only about immediately possible...that's why WE are here. ;) With our anthropocentrism. %)

porphobot:\\What he didn't recognize is that if the sun is in the system, then the sun's gain of entropy counts toward the whole.

Yeap. "Burning" of the Sun increase entropy...but it can do it ONLY because there is that VAST Universe to dissipate it...if it'll be closed in Solar System border for example, it would achieve equilibrium long ago.So... Sun is needed as Source of neg-entropy.But Black Sky are also needed... to dump excess of energy. ;)That's why Universe itself is thermodynamical machine. %)

That's why the laws of thermodynamics state that the entropy of the universe must increase, not the entropy of any portion of the universe. But...

Therefore...

\\It makes no difference to the outcome where you consider the boundaries of "the system" in question.

is not correct.

I think we're each using "the system" in different ways. Here's how I mean it.

If earth is "the system", then the sun is an external factor which is providing an energy input into the system. Entropy of the (earth) system is allowed to decrease (e.g., evolution is possible) because the system is not a closed one. Energy is coming in.

On the other hand, if the sun is included in "the system", then the system is (for all intents and purposes) closed. No energy is coming in or out (ok, almost no energy--work with me). That means that entropy of the system may not decrease. However, the sun's entropy increase now counts toward the total. Localized entropy can still decrease (e.g., evolution is possible) as long as it doesn't decrease more than the sun's entropy increases. The laws of thermodynamics only speak to the net increase of the entire system.

My larger point was that both of these are different interpretations of the exact same physical phenomena. What's happening in the real world is the same no matter where you draw the boundaries of "the system". They are different types of maps of the same territory.

To your point about the solar system reaching equilibrium--no, that's where I think we're using the same words differently. You're talking about what would happen if the solar system were a closed system. What I'm saying is that you can call the solar system "the system", but you have to then account for the energy enters and leaves the system.

As to why I insist that Foundation is a separate work from the robot novels, I'm not giving up on explaining, but will have to think about how to explain more carefully.

\\I think we're each using "the system" in different ways. Here's how I mean it.

What defines "the system"? Other then it's boundaries? ;)

\\On the other hand, if the sun is included in "the system", then the system is (for all intents and purposes) closed.

That's the point. No. It CANNOT be closed. ;)

\\No energy is coming in or out (ok, almost no energy--work with me).

HOW?!! Almost ALL energy, all radiation of the Sun are going straightforward and beyond Solar System.And even that energy... VERY little part of it which caught by planets... also come out almost immediately.

\\Localized entropy can still decrease (e.g., evolution is possible) as long as it doesn't decrease more than the sun's entropy increases.

It could be good for you to read about Karno Cycle.To learn what thermodynamical machines are all about. ;)

\\As to why I insist that Foundation is a separate work from the robot novels...

It's no-brainer.I do not oppose that its "separate works".Each novel, each text are separate. Per se.

But we are talking about _distinctive_ separation.About how elements of the same set... are still different.

LH: "As to why I insist that Foundation is a separate work from the robot novels..."

I read parts of "I, Asimov" and other blurbs on the subject (too lazy to scrape up all the links right now). He basically said they paid him a sh@tload of money to write more sequels, they strongly suggested that he combine all the worlds into one, there's the 'Dickens Disease' that seems to compel authors to fully render characters that may have been only briefly introduced in early stories, etc. Also he said, they're my books, I'll do whatever I like with them.

I never met him, but I know others who did, and they say he was really wonderful, but a bit cantankerous at times.

They may be his books, but I have my opinion on them. The original Foundation trilogy is 'foundational' to myself and others. I refuse to regard it as a rough draft of a more perfect story written decades later.

porohobot:\I think we're each using "the system" in different ways. Here's how I mean it.

What defines "the system"? Other then it's boundaries? ;)

Nothing. We define "the system" we are considering by defining its boundaries.

\\On the other hand, if the sun is included in "the system", then the system is (for all intents and purposes) closed.

That's the point. No. It CANNOT be closed. ;)\\No energy is coming in or out (ok, almost no energy--work with me).

HOW?!! Almost ALL energy, all radiation of the Sun are going straightforward and beyond Solar System.And even that energy... VERY little part of it which caught by planets... also come out almost immediately.

Even if we limit "the system" to the earth and the small piece of the sun which is shining directly onto the earth, the total entropy of the system would increase enough to allow for local decreases. If this were not the case, it wouldn't just refute the possibility of evolution. As an example, weather probably wouldn't be possible either.

porohobot:\\As to why I insist that Foundation is a separate work from the robot novels...

It's no-brainer.I do not oppose that its "separate works".Each novel, each text are separate. Per se.

But we are talking about _distinctive_ separation.About how elements of the same set... are still different.

The Caves of Steel and The Naked Sun are a set. While they are separate novels, each with a beginning, middle, and end, they involve the same characters (Lije Bailey and R. Daneel Olivaw) and the same setting (an earth surrounded by hostile, robot-based spacer colonies). They are of the same "universe" in the same way that the separate James Bond novels are.

Similarly, the original Foundation Trilogy (actually, the short stories which were compiled into those novels) share a "universe" with each other. They are separate stories, but they follow logically from one to the next. Again, they share the same setting (the populated galaxy), and where chronology doesn't often permit the same characters to survive from one to the next, the later characters do make consistent reference to those who came before.

In each case, the details provided by each new novel in the series inform the reader about the overall collection.

My problem comes in when Asimov tries to make the details in the two sets of novels consistent with each other--to make details of the robot books inform the world of Foundation and vice versa. As Dr Brin points out, the most notable question is "Why are robots missing from the Foundation stories?" For me, that's like asking why Sherlock Holmes mysteries, which take place in 1880s and 1890s London just as Dracula does, have no mention of vampires. But instead, Asmiov has to go to ridiculous lengths to invent explanations as to how the one world led to the other. Some of that involves individual robots engaging in draconian behind-the-scenes control over all of human history in ways that (to me) don't feel like they belong to the same R Daneel Olivaw I got to know in the earlier books. It also rubs me very wrong that Hari Seldon isn't just the Isaac Newton or Albert Einstein-like father of a new science of psychohistory, but that robots have spend millennia directing humans in such a way as to engineer the appearance of someone like Seldon for the express purpose of having him invent psychohistory so that the robots could then use it for their own purposes.

This is the same kind of degrading of the original concepts for the sake of contrived continuity that ruined the Star Wars saga for me, and it's why I hope to God that Dr Brin doesn't go fully down the path he teases at of forcing the Uplift books to fit into the universe of Existence.

No one asks why 2001: A Space Odyssey and Childhood's End are not mutually consistent, or has to come up with a contrived explanation of why they really are. The same can apply to the distinct set of series that Asimov wrote.

Mike Will:They may be his books, but I have my opinion on them. The original Foundation trilogy is 'foundational' to myself and others. I refuse to regard it as a rough draft of a more perfect story written decades later.

Agreed on all points.

I have the same discussion with people who say George Lucas can do whatever he wants to Star Wars. I never said Asimov couldn't write what he wanted--just that I wished. he hadn't.

\\As Dr Brin points out, the most notable question is "Why are robots missing from the Foundation stories?". For me, that's like asking why Sherlock Holmes mysteries, which take place in 1880s and 1890s London just as Dracula does, have no mention of vampires.

I do not know Asimov's works to that extent. Just among other sifi books from library.With emphasis on short stories.

But isn't Sheldon's beloved one. His guarding angel.Depicted as definitely a robot? (khm... that separate sentence -- is it bad with words order?)

So it's more like Sherlock Holmes story where he investigating cases of deaths because of neck bits and blood loss. ;)

\\Asmiov has to go to ridiculous lengths to invent explanations as to how the one world led to the other.

Or... it was deliberately. And for totally different purposes.

My proposal looks more consistent as for me, still.

\\but that robots have spend millennia directing humans in such a way as to engineer the appearance of someone like Seldon for the express purpose of having him invent psychohistory so that the robots could then use it for their own purposes.

porohobot:But isn't [S]eldon's beloved one. His guarding angel.Depicted as definitely a robot? (khm... that separate sentence -- is it bad with words order?)

That's part of the retcon (retroactive continuity) that I object to. The original Foundation trilogy had no female robot bodyguard.

\\but that robots have spend millennia directing humans in such a way as to engineer the appearance of someone like Seldon for the express purpose of having him invent psychohistory so that the robots could then use it for their own purposes.

Only one big chasm... HOW that humanity become able to colonize thousands of planets?That's not easy task, as we know today. And need as humongous machinery, as oceans of knowledge.

So... try to look at it from my this POV.People traveled across parsecs of Space. Somehow.Terraformed wild and unhospitable planets into earthlike. Somehow.And... for only purpose. To become noble savages. De-evoluted bigots.So that some old fart from one of still not decline one.Would come up with his "ingenious" plan.

Well. I have nothing agains such plot. I remember one similar -- "Star Viknig" where such plot are quite enjoyable.

But... here is my question -- and how you see author of such loosy plot... a genious writer? ;)

Several people have stated they did not like Asimov's retcon of the Robot and Galactic Empire universes. As another HUGE Asimov fan, I agree. But I always understood that he did it for the money. And he probably enjoyed the challenge.

But I really hated the retcon of using "The Ends of Eternity" universe to explain why there were no aliens. And why there were so many habitable worlds.

The later books imply that robots were hidden manipulators, but the original stories themselves taken at face value? No, nary a robot mentioned. And not as a plot device, as if the reader would wonder, "Why aren't there any robots?" No robots in the stories just like no vampires in the stories.

Only one big chasm... HOW that humanity become able to colonize thousands of planets?That's not easy task, as we know today. And need as humongous machinery, as oceans of knowledge.

And see, therein lies the root of the problem. You (and Asimov) not only tried to make the two series consistent with each other, you're insisting on making them consistent with the real world as well, requiring reams of storytelling devoted to a convoluted, just-barely plausible chain of events which would get us from here to there. To me, that's more an exercise in fanfic (fan fiction) than anything else. It doesn't make for a compelling story, and it goes off the rails of what made the early stories compelling to begin with.

Sci-fi often starts with a fantastical premise--a "What if this happened? Where would it lead?" What makes it good science (as opposed to outright fantasy) is that the plot follows reasonably from the premise. Extrapolating backwards from the premise is not the point of the exercise. In Foundation, the inhabited Galaxy of populated planets--analogous to an empire of inhabited countries--and the fact that the expanded human population is large enough to follow statistical laws is the premise. What's interesting is what follows from that, not how that came to be.

You may be familiar with Kafka's Metamorphosis. In the very first paragraph, the protagonist wakes up having somehow become a giant bug. The story is about what life is like from that starting point. A trilogy detailing the biological mechanism by which that transformation occurred would not serve the story. Rather, it would sideline it. That's what I'm getting at.

There is a reason why I took one word from Greg Bear's FOUNDATION AND CHAOS and talked both Gregs into inserting some passages that would let me expand in FT on the one thing Isaac's universe desperately needed...

...a REASON why humans are so utterly incapable of governing themselves, in his cosmology. A reason why Giskard and the Zeroth Law robots felt they absolutely had to essentially lobotomize our descendants, and ban all new robots, for 20,000 years.

The only possible reason was that we're ill. Something hit us, and debilitated our minds. A clue to it is found in CAVES OF STEEL where Earthlings become agoraphobes, unable to stand outside. What We introduced to Asimovia -- and the Asimov heirs approved - was "Chaos"... a disease of instability that hits hard whenever a human society rises up to breakout renaissance levels of individual genius and ambition and unstoppable innovation (with the reinvention of robots.)

In FOUNDATION'S TRIUMPH I work out the logic, weaving in almost all previous Asimov novels, even the minor ones. Moreover, given the chaos spreading through the West, I do not rule out the possibility that I was prophetic.

>> Smurphs said...\\Several people have stated they did not like Asimov's retcon of the Robot and Galactic Empire universes. As another HUGE Asimov fan, I agree. But I always understood that he did it for the money. And he probably enjoyed the challenge.

It depends GREATLY from the notion of "psychohistory"

Hari Seldon is a genious. Ok. BUT WHERE HE TOOK RAW DATA???Needed to develop such complex theory as psychohistory was described all the way long.

If answer "from his ingenuity"? Then it's a scam.It's just a history of "wise Moses interpreted faraoh's dream" in new shiny wrapper.Of course it's wise to be prepared for possible problems in future.But if that's all you need from sifi story %) read Bible. There lots of such trivia.

But if answer is. There was, and is, some long lasting organization.Be it postal service, closed community of nerds or religious fanatics... or robots. %)That collected, filtered and tried to make conclusions over vast massive of data on human history.And Hari... was just one of the many, one who stands on the backs of previous ones.Who geniously grok the problem. At last.

But that's it still nothing genious in such plot. No moral in such fable. IMHO.

>> Larry Hart said...//No, nary a robot mentioned. And not as a plot device, as if the reader would wonder, "Why aren't there any robots?"

And why'd you need ones?Did you read and will you read a story, where important actor would be a Rumba-bot? ;)

Well... they made Volly. %)) But it's cartoon. And he's adorable. ;)

\\You (and Asimov) not only tried to make the two series consistent with each other, you're insisting on making them consistent with the real world as well...

Stop, stop, stop... so, Asimov is a writer of a sci-fantasy? And not the hard sifi? Ou-Key. I say. %)

\\and it goes off the rails of what made the early stories compelling to begin with.

I DO undestand it.Still. I like Wern. And hardly would stop liking his ancient style. And scientific implausibility.

\\is that the plot follows reasonably from the premise.

If reader allows it himself. It seems.

\\In Foundation, the inhabited Galaxy of populated planets--analogous to an empire of inhabited countries--and the fact that the expanded human population is large enough to follow statistical laws is the premise.

Dr Brin:...a REASON why humans are so utterly incapable of governing themselves, in his cosmology. A reason why Giskard and the Zeroth Law robots felt they absolutely had to essentially lobotomize our descendants, and ban all new robots, for 20,000 years.

The only possible reason was that we're ill. Something hit us, and debilitated our minds.

And that's exactly what I mean about something that the original trilogy was so not about. Yes, you filled in a backstory with consummate skill, but the original stories never even begged that question until it was decided retroactively that R Daneel Olivaw was in Foundation's past.

I'm saying you did a fantastic job of converting gold into lead, but I wanted the gold.

Just so I'm not only complaining, I did love your "proof" that humanity didn't go the route of Gaia. And see, that was more a return to the original concept than a departure from it.

End of Eternity was written quite early, 1955. If Asimov put hints in it to his Galactic books (Foundation Trilogy), and a radioactive Earth, he must have played with the idea of creating an all-encompassing Universe for his stories already back then. So I think it was something he did for more than the money, he must have wanted it for himself too.

I may very well be "a libertarian like a bank robber is a customer", much in the same way our host is 'a libertarian like a bank teller is a customer', the problem being that the average citizen is like the bank customer who is so beset by bank fees, surcharges, penalties & restrictions that he can no longer tell the difference between the equally confiscatory robber & teller.

I take issue with Larry & David's take on Asimov's Foundation because (1) Asimov was a chemist rather than 'an engineer' so his tales are more reflective of chemical equilibria rather than mechanical structures, (2) his Zeroth Law was a legalistic nightmare that failed to either define 'humanity' or resolve anything plot-wise, and (3) his rather humanistic tales never ever implied that humanity was 'ill', 'defective' or 'broken' in any way.

It was only after Asimov's death that certain 'transhumanists' argued that humans were somehow 'ill' or 'imperfect' machines who needed to be lobotomised, cured, converted into or dominated by flawless robotic perfection.

And, frankly speaking, I found David's comments a little too reminiscent of certain racist historical 'Protocols' when he made the rather undemocratic suggestion that Humans-in-General (1) were 'innumerable-cheap-expendable and ignorant and powerless' dupes who (2) were to be rightfully dominated by a 'powerful and secretly manipulative ruling caste of (servile) court eunuchs'.

Gag! The 'libertarian like a bank robber' in me just threw up a little in his own mouth when he re-read the foul elitist & patriarchal opinions expressed by our 'libertarian like a bank teller' & self-appointed guardian.

Heads will roll because unrepentant elitists like May, Merkel, Macron & certain US politicians have reached the same conclusion as our fine host, having concluded the human populace-in-general is too expendable, too ignorant & too deplorable to be trusted with democracy.

Porohobot:Thanks for the suggestion of antivirus scanners. Regarding the issue of Google satellite imagery; I certainly refer to the images obtained in Google Earth; Then, when viewing the images, the names appear:

Maybe all Google images have creative commons licenses. But in reality, I do not know.And I wonder if the images that are published by the Russian army are of free use, because the images provided by the American army if they are of free use.

porohobot said...\\As Dr Brin points out, the most notable question is "Why are robots missing from the Foundation stories?". For me, that's like asking why Sherlock Holmes mysteries, which take place in 1880s and 1890s London just as Dracula does, have no mention of vampires.

Check out The Holmes-Dracula File, by Fred Saberhagen. His Dracula books are great fun (mostly).

A chilling overview of the career of James Buchanan, the intellectual godfather of the Kochs brothers and their long project to alter our political system into... well, something John Calhoun would approve of. Quoting from the article:

Calhoun was an intellectual and political powerhouse in the South from the 1820s until his death in 1850, expending his formidable energy to defend slavery. Calhoun, called the “Marx of the Master Class” by historian Richard Hofstadter, saw himself and his fellow southern oligarchs as victims of the majority. Therefore, as MacLean explains, he sought to create “constitutional gadgets” to constrict the operations of government.

Economists Tyler Cowen and Alexander Tabarrok, both of George Mason University, have noted the two men’s affinities, heralding Calhoun “a precursor of modern public choice theory” who “anticipates” Buchanan’s thinking. MacLean observes that both focused on how democracy constrains property owners and aimed for ways to restrict the latitude of voters. She argues that unlike even the most property-friendly founders Alexander Hamilton and James Madison, Buchanan wanted a private governing elite of corporate power that was wholly released from public accountability.

Suppressing voting, changing legislative processes so that a normal majority could no longer prevail, sowing public distrust of government institutions— all these were tactics toward the goal. But the Holy Grail was the Constitution: alter it and you could increase and secure the power of the wealthy in a way that no politician could ever challenge.

And with backing from the Kochs and other oligarchic clans, the Virginia school has nearly succeeded, mostly without the media noticing or warning the public, as intended.

>> locumranch said...\\(3) his rather humanistic tales never ever implied that humanity was 'ill', 'defective' or 'broken' in any way.

It's strange to support locum but.

Yeap. That is the point.

Only. I already read about it, somewhere.Ouh-Yes, Lem was writing about it.

In "Contemplator of Genesis Happy"(Google translation %)),or yet more graphically depicted in "Altruizine, or A True Account of How Bonhomius the Hermetic Hermit Tried to Bring About Universal Happiness, and What Came of It".

\\Gag! The 'libertarian like a bank robber' in me just threw up a little in his own mouth when he re-read the foul elitist & patriarchal opinions expressed by our 'libertarian like a bank teller' & self-appointed guardian.

You are TOO haste. As always.Who Asimov mean under his "robots"? Members of foundations, etc?Who, if not Them Who Know Better? Educated, Enlightened, Entitled with all greatest traits? %)

But... it's ce la ve.

And it is TOO what Lem was writing about. %P

All other your "thoughts" here is as ever. Foul-mouthing. Plain rubbish. %))))

I sort of wonder, as a foreigner, that more Americans (including our host) that America's beloved Constitution is a lot of the problem. With a less absurd system there would be no McConnel and no Trump.

...individual robots engaging in draconian behind-the-scenes control over all of human history in ways that (to me) don't feel like they belong to the same R Daneel Olivaw I got to know in the earlier books.

R. Daneel was built with both the inability to let a human suffer by inaction, and enough intelligence to see that humans often suffer unnecessarily and are even at risk of extinction. What else could he do?

Richard09:porohobot said...\\As Dr Brin points out, the most notable question is "Why are robots missing from the Foundation stories?". For me, that's like asking why Sherlock Holmes mysteries, which take place in 1880s and 1890s London just as Dracula does, have no mention of vampires.

Check out The Holmes-Dracula File, by Fred Saberhagen. His Dracula books are great fun (mostly).

That was actually me that porohobot was quoting above.

And I have read Saberhagen's Dracula books, including the one with Holmes. And yes, they are very entertaining.

But that's what I mean by "fanfic", or what D.C. Comics would call an "imaginary story". THe existence of The Holmes-Dracula File doesn't force all of the other Holmes stories (or Bram Stoker's novel, for that matter) to be consistent with it.

I'd have been much happier if Asimov did one stand-alone novel that posited the connection between the robot stories and Foundation, and then left it alone, kinda the way one of our host's novels (limited spoiler) suggests the possible beginnings of the Uplift universe in our lifetime.

Existence plays in a very different universe than the Uplift novels. While you can certainly have uplift of other species in Existence, I hope Dr. Brin won't try to use it to fit the book and series together.

I didn't need the early uplift in Existence. A nice side story, but in a long book with many side stories, some of which (like the autism one) have more to do with the central theme than this one, I could have done without.

It was totally unintentional. Just by random browsing. How could I do that, if I'd like to find counter-arguments in his own word... and found that in the _first_ random link clicked???

I encontered Asimov's story "That Thou Art Mindful of Him"(1974)...

exactly about THAT question.

Plot is simple. U.S.Robotics Corp. exist 200 (two handred years)and their product -- robots, as androids as mere positronic minds... all ruled by 3 lawsare more then successfull... but still, only in spheras too complex or too harmfull for humans.

But NOT on the general market. People DO NOT like to see em like their peers.

(1) He was a nuclear power enthusiast & apologist, infamous for arguing that Three Mile Island & Chernobyl style nuclear accidents were simply the price humanity has to pay for mastering atomic power, an argument that relates directly to his 'Radioactive Earth' future histories;

(2) He specifically states that Robots are BANNED on population-dense worlds like Earth -- in both 'Caves of Steel' and 'Naked Sun', to be precise -- because of fears of human demographic replacement; and

(3) His characters were most certainly 'flawed', mostly as a plot device to allow his protagonists to overcome their limitations, but he NEVER ever argues that humans would be BETTER if they were more perfect, mechanical or slavishly 'robotic'. I credit Sturgeon's 'More than Human' for starting the whole modern transhumanism trend, btw.

Why don't we discuss Stanislaw Lem more at Pohorobota's slavic suggestion as his culture provides the etymologic & definitional source of both of the terms 'robot' and 'slave'?

is a scientist, futurist and best-selling author. His novels include Earth, Existence, The Postman, and Kiln People, as well as Hugo Award winners Startide Rising and The Uplift War. The Transparent Society won a Freedom of Speech Award of the American Library Assn.